In modern power design, balancing performance, cost, and supply chain stability is key. This article takes two classic Vishay MOSFETs—SUD35N10-26P-BE3 (TO-252) and SIR680DP-T1-RE3 (PowerPAK SO-8)—as benchmarks, analyzing their design focus and application scenarios, while evaluating two domestic alternatives, VBE1102N and VBGQA1803. By comparing parameter differences and performance orientations, we provide a clear selection guide for your next power switching solution.
Comparative Analysis: SUD35N10-26P-BE3 (N-channel) vs. VBE1102N
Analysis of the Original Model (SUD35N10-26P-BE3) Core:
This is a 100V N-channel MOSFET from Vishay in a TO-252AA package. It is designed for robust, cost-effective power switching. Its key advantages include a drain-source voltage (Vdss) of 100V, a continuous drain current (Id) of 35A (pulsed), and an on-resistance (RDS(on)) of 26mΩ at 10V gate drive. It offers a reliable balance of voltage rating and current capability for medium-power applications.
Compatibility and Differences of the Domestic Alternative (VBE1102N):
VBsemi's VBE1102N is a pin-to-pin compatible alternative in the same TO-252 package. The main differences are in electrical parameters: VBE1102N matches the 100V voltage rating but offers significantly better performance with a lower on-resistance of 18mΩ (@10V) and a higher continuous current rating of 45A.
Key Application Areas:
Original Model SUD35N10-26P-BE3: Suitable for 100V system applications requiring dependable switching at moderate currents, such as power supplies, motor drives, and DC-DC converters where cost and availability are factors.
Alternative Model VBE1102N: An excellent performance upgrade, ideal for applications demanding lower conduction losses and higher current handling within the same footprint, such as more efficient motor controllers or higher-current power switches.
Comparative Analysis: SIR680DP-T1-RE3 (N-channel) vs. VBGQA1803
Analysis of the Original Model (SIR680DP-T1-RE3) Core:
This Vishay MOSFET in a PowerPAK SO-8 package represents high-density, high-performance switching. As a TrenchFET Gen IV device, it is optimized for ultra-low RDS(on) and gate charge (Qg). Its core advantages are an 80V Vdss, a very high continuous current of 100A, and an exceptionally low RDS(on) of 2.9mΩ at 10V. It is designed for applications where minimizing switching and conduction losses is critical.
Compatibility and Differences of the Domestic Alternative (VBGQA1803):
VBsemi's VBGQA1803, in a DFN8(5x6) package, serves as a high-performance alternative. It matches the 80V rating and pushes key parameters further: an even lower RDS(on) of 2.65mΩ (@10V) and a higher continuous current rating of 140A, leveraging SGT (Shielded Gate Trench) technology.
Key Application Areas:
Original Model SIR680DP-T1-RE3: Perfect for high-frequency, high-efficiency applications like synchronous rectification in server/telecom power supplies and primary-side switching in DC-DC converters, where its excellent FOM (Figure of Merit) is crucial.
Alternative Model VBGQA1803: A superior choice for the most demanding applications requiring maximum current capability and minimum on-resistance, such as next-generation high-power density converters, advanced motor drives, or any design needing an efficiency and power margin boost.
Conclusion:
This analysis reveals two clear paths:
For standard 100V applications in a TO-252 package, the original SUD35N10-26P-BE3 provides reliable performance, while its domestic alternative VBE1102N offers a compelling upgrade with lower RDS(on) and higher current.
For high-performance 80V applications, the original SIR680DP-T1-RE3 sets a high benchmark with its excellent FOM. The domestic alternative VBGQA1803 emerges as a formidable "performance-plus" option, exceeding in both current handling and conduction resistance.
The core takeaway is precise requirement matching. Domestic alternatives like VBE1102N and VBGQA1803 not only provide viable, supply-chain-resilient options but also deliver parameter advancements, giving engineers greater flexibility in design optimization and cost-performance trade-offs.